The High Court, considering a petition for bail in a case of rape and offences under PCPOCSO where the doctor reported no signs of rape, rejected the petitioner's plea and directed the trial court to conclude the trial within six months.
Bail rejected; trial directed to conclude within six months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.7417 of 2015
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -68 Year- 2014 Thana -MAHILA P.S. District- NALANDA (BIHARSHARIFF)
====================================================== Rohit Raj @ Lakhi Kumar Son of Sanjay Prasad Resident of village-Mustafapur, Police Station- Rahui, District- Nalanda .... .... Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Raj Kishor Prasad, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. M. Rab (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER
5 08-04-2015 Heard both sides.
The petitioner seeks bail in Mahila P.S. Case No. 68 of
2014, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 4, 6 and 8 of Protection of Children Sexual Act, 2012.
The prosecutrix made very specific allegation that the petitioner committed rape with her.
Shri Yogesh Chandra Verma, the learned Senior counsel submits that the doctor did not find any sign of rape and no spermatozoa was found, the hymen was found intact. On the aforesaid findings the police did not find the case true under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and submitted charge sheet under Section 354 A, 354 B and 354 C of the Indian Penal Code.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7417 of 2015 (5) dt.08-04-2015
2/2
On the face of record, it appears that the victim alleged that it was the petitioner who committed rape with her and on alarm fled away.
Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above named on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, if the trial is not concluded the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.)
KKSINHA/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted bail pending trial despite the doctor finding no signs of rape.
Whether the trial court should be directed to expedite the trial of the charges.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Rohit Raj @ Lakhi Kumar
The State of Bihar
Prabhat Kumar Jha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
